 To go into the point, the aim that me and the colleagues that co-authored this presentation are aimed is to outline how the primary school curriculum repeats and perpetuates certain colonial representations of Pasadena's populations, and how this has shaped the idea, the general public half of Pas' people in the island, in the island of the Dominican Republic and Haiti, particularly in relation to the political and territorial configurations. So in order to contextualize a little bit, we are working in the island that today is shared by the Dominican Republic and Haiti and was formerly called La Española or Hispaniola by Columbus. As you perhaps already know, Columbus arrived to today's Bahamas in 1492, and then he surveyed around the Bahamas and today's sister in Cuba and the northern part of the island that is the object of our study. In the first trip, he built the fort of La Navidad in today's northern Haiti, and in the second trip, the Villa of La Isabella here in the northern Dominican Republic. And since that moment on was his work and the work of the explorers and conquerors begin to create and shape an image of the indigenous population that has been perpetuated and keep empty today. But for this presentation, we are particularly exploring one case, which is the map created by Jesuit Frey, Pierre Francois, Syriar Charlewa, that represented in the 18th century, very late considering the history of the Caribbean, the indigenous populations or the former indigenous population. So by the time he created this map, these populations were already obliterated by the conquest process or integrated to the colonial society. So he created this image of five chiefdom, which is a chiefdom for the ones unfamiliar with the term. It's a hierarchical political system where there is a casique, which is equal to the king. And then there are under his rule layers of different members like the Nitaíno, which is equal or similar to the noble people, the Bajique, which are the shamans, and the Navorias, which can be interpreted as the commoners. So the interesting thing about this map is that he, based again on the early 16th century chronicles, create an image of territoriality and of hierarchical relations in the island that were actually not existed at that time. And that image and that representation were taken by later on archaeologists and historians in order to interpret Indian's populations, political hierarchies, and the history in general. And in the work that we are doing, only by making a simple exercise of specializing all the different ethnic groups that the same chronicles of the 16th century mentioned for the northern area of the island, we were able to see that, actually, the territories that they associate to one particular group, or some particular casique, as you can see, they are shared by different groups. So we're going to see the Bajínos, where one group, and the Macorís, and the Sihuayos, and then the map only show one image of the past. So the point with this map is that in the 20th century, it has been standardized as a standard information of half Indian population lived. And as you can see here, there is very Phaefakasi cathode. So the Sihuayos idea and the map represents today aspect that the population is proud of. First, because it shows political hierarchy, in the sense that the casique is equal to the kin, and then it has a full hierarchical relation. And second, because the territorial structure can be interpreted also as countries. So in our experience, in my case, I am an archaeologist, and my colleagues, they are educators and museologists. In our experience in the Dominican Republic, what we have seen is that the people are proud of this. They say, whoa, even that the people in the past were naked, and they didn't know anything. They at least had a casique, so the casique was the kin. So that was actually quite good. And then there was the casical territories, which were the country. So then we begin to see that this, at least, to pinpoint now these two aspects are actually quite of an important element for the people today in the country. However, we argue that these two aspects are actually a colonialist inheritance, because those are the elements that the Spaniards, when they arrive to the island, identify in the indigenous population as something that they can understood and was later described to them in order to explain and to create this bias image of the indigenous population. So here, we face a challenge. So we think, how to find a common ground to first incorporate new archaeological and historical finds in relation to the model of the five casicas to the general public, as well as in the classroom settings, which is a particularly interested, and then, of course, in the long term, to the educational curriculum. However, without affecting or attacking the idea, the emotional connection, and the proud that the people today have on this model, which is the main point. So a first step that we are doing now is that we create a questionnaire to have a first feedback from primary school teachers, which allow us to begin to consider a bottom up perspective on this matter, since creating a new model and presenting it to the people will, in our opinion, will not work. So even that, we are the scientists or archaeologists just bringing a new model and saying, this is the new model. What you have believed or your life is wrong. So this is the truth. That will not work. So we thought that a more communicative and dialogical approach is actually needed. So for this pilot study that we are doing, we carry on some self-administrative questionnaire and a proposed sampling method was followed. And in total, this is not going to work, right? No. OK. You can point to it. Yes. Yes. And in total, we passed this questionnaire in six schools of La Romana district, which is this area, as you can see here in red. So although we have the questionnaire was longer, for this presentation, we wanted only to focus on four of the questions that we did. So the first one, we asked the teachers, explain briefly what do you understand by the name of Chifton or the Casigaswa. So as you can see here, most of the teachers thought that the concept of Chifton is related to territorial organization and not necessarily to political organization, which is, in our perspective, an evidence of the idea of the map that I showed you before that is very present on people's mind. So then we asked them, did you know that the island existed? That in the island existed other indigenous group beside the Taíno. And also, as you can see, most of them, they said yes. They thought that they know that there are other groups beside the Taíno. However, when we asked them, can you please explain or name one or two of the other ethnic groups that live there? Actually, only one of the 17 teachers that we interviewed was able to identify an actual ethnic group back in the past, which is this one here, the Macorises, being the Arauacos and the Carives, two linguistic big groups. So they are not necessarily related to a particular ethnic group. And then the Ignaris is actually a group from the Lesser Antilles. And then, as you see in the former graph, the Taínos and the Taínos were part of the same structure. And C1A is actually something called, archeologically, the Western Taínos and the classic Taínos is also an archeological concept. So what we are seeing here is that even that the people know or the teachers know that there were many groups, the information is not clear, since, again, the image of the five facacicas on map seems to be guiding and leading all the understanding on this matter. So then we ask them, what would you say if you were told that in the past there might have been another territorial configuration thinking on a very, for us, subliminal way of seeing what they would say, and if they were open to actually accept a new spatial configuration? And actually, as you can see here, one third of the teachers' interview think that the map and the skin or this model is what it is, and it doesn't need any changing. With comments such as, previously, our territory was divided into five chiefdoms that played the role of freedom, or this other one says, I really think that in the past, the territorial division was configured as it was in the time of the casicas, referring, again, to this map. And then another one third of the professors' interview, they say it is possible, with a very big answer of, and then another one third didn't answer this question. So this is actually quite characteristic for us and lead us to this final question is, if you were presented an alternative information on the configuration of the new chiefdom or the five territories, do you consider that the presentation of a new map would be enough to teach the model? And they say most of them they say no, which is, again, quite interesting considering that what I have been trying to say, most of the information that they have and they reproduce is actually based on a map. And so in order to conclude, in order to think on this negotiating historical heritage or about this map, there are, we identified three main issues. The first one is the casicasal concept and its spatial representation is taught in social studies in primary school settings and it is intrinsically associated to Dominican's identity and the idea of passing the years of populations. Second, however, the use of primary sources within this educational context is, of course, limited to general books that present a historical portrait repeating colonialist bias in the sense of this homogenization and invasivilization of the indigenous world. And lastly, today's population identified an idea of the indigenous population that comes from this bias representation creating an unconscious bias towards the indigenous identity, diversity, and history. So for us, after the next steps are first, we think that teachers need resources to connect and explore the current research in archaeology and history within, of course, possibilities. And in this case, I am pointing out the technological resources in the sense that most schools in the Dominican Republic don't have access to internet, for example. So then, we will need to adapt any information that we did and presented in different type of resources. Secondly, some of them don't even have electricity, actually. Secondly, although the old map seems to have impacted greatly in people's idea, often the indigenous political organization, they think that a new map will not be enough to propose that alternative less bias perspective. So then, the design of digital and other learning resources has to come from a collaborative platform with the school teachers and museum. And then, this is our next step that we will follow. First, we will present current research in pilot schools. So the archaeological research that I'm doing in the island in order to highlight the diversity of ethnical groups in the island and how they were configured along the territory or along the island. And then, review their ideas and articulate new research since we think that if we actually want to try to get into the peoples and change something, it doesn't only, I mean, it should be something collaborative with all teachers and communities. And then, prepare a first model. Then, present this model to other schools in other regions of the country in order to test the different perspectives that these settings are having, and then presenting it again to sector of academic society in the Dominican Republic and eventually, in the long term, if the models are accepted and useful, then presented to the Ministry of Education to really try to make a change in the curriculum. So thank you very much. Thank you.